Indiana salaries

I've noticed a few job postings lately for planning director positions in Indiana--one in a suburb of Indy and another in NW Indiana near Chicago. What surprises me is the relatively low salary range advertised for these executive positions: they are advertised at $40 to 50K. My question for the Indiana planners is: Is 40-50 the real range, or do planning directors actually get higher offers? In my experience some cities will advertise at a lower range than they are actually willing to pay (my current position as a planning manager is an example-it was advertised in the upper 40's 3 years ago, but I was given an offer in the middle 50's). It seems to me that cities in those areas (especially NW Indiana) would have to compete for quality managers in other nearby areas making more than the cities are advertising. So, I guess in a roundabout way I'm asking whether it's a waste of time to apply for one of these positions, because if 40-50 is the real range then it's not worth the effort. Thanks.

I've observed the same thing, and have come to the conclusion that the attitude in Indiana is similar to many places here in Wisconsin. The majority of the population in the towns is "blue collar" and earn working class wages. There is a lack of appreciation for the skills and functions of management versus those "who do the real work," and a reluctance to pay the sort of wages that they are themselves unlikely to attain.

As for advertising below what they may actually pay, I find this is rarely the case. More often the opposite is true. A salary range is advertised, but then in the interview they say that they don't intend to offer more than the midpoint.

I agree!!! I am here in Louisville, KY right accross from IN and have been following things for some time. another thing I would add happens to be the strong property rights sentiment in KY and IN, as well as other places I am sure. Planning for is not understood well and for many any attempt to regulate land use policies is view as some sort of weird socialist or even worst, communist scheme!!! lol. its crazy. for a lot of communities that are extremely autocentric many people question the need of planning - they ask, if its not broken, why fix it! people can be complacent with things especially when they don't have any other place or vision to compare it to.

As an ex-Hoosier, I still remember seeing planners' salaries in Indiana. I recall one chart showing them being the third lowest in the nation.

Off Topic (But related): Another observation, and correct me if I am wrong-but it appears to me that New England planners salaries are also very low-when you factor in the very high cost of living. Is that the case, in general? I remember mid-level salaries in the Boston suburbs being in the 30s and 40s.

Originally posted by BKM Off Topic (But related): Another observation, and correct me if I am wrong-but it appears to me that New England planners salaries are also very low-when you factor in the very high cost of living. Is that the case, in general? I remember mid-level salaries in the Boston suburbs being in the 30s and 40s.

Depends where in New England. Northern New England, yes....predominantly below average starting salaries. Southern New England is better, but still not commensurate with cost of living IMHO.

"Growth is inevitable and desirable, but destruction of community character is not. The question is not whether your part of the world is going to change. The question is how." -- Edward T. McMahon, The Conservation Fund

Originally posted by NHPlanner Southern New England is better, but still not commensurate with cost of living IMHO.

From my job hunting and looking around I'd have to agree. High 40's for an area where $1000 rents are common, does not contribute to a real good standard of living. Unless of course the taxes are that much less than here.

Too lazy to beat myself up for being to lazy to beat myself up for being too lazy to... well you get the point....